Nikon Coolpix P330 Hands-on Preview

Nikon is a relative newcomer to the small, high-quality compact camera market. Although for the past couple of years the Coolpix P300 and P310 offered excellent build quality and a similar user experience to competitive models like the Canon PowerShot S110, neither featured a raw capture mode, and both used comparatively small 1/2.3" sensor rather than the 1/1.7" sensors commonly found in their high-end peers.

The Nikon Coolpix P330 changes this dynamic, offering both raw mode and a larger, lower-resolution sensor (almost certainly the same 12MP one found in the Coolpix P7700), without sacrificing what was good about its predecessors - a compact form factor, relatively fast lens, good build quality, and a useful zoom range. As such it represents Nikon's most serious attempt to offer a real competitor to the Canon PowerShot S110 and its popular predecessors the S100 and S95. At an MSRP of $379, the P330 is competitive on price, too.

Nikon Coolpix P330: Key Specifications

12.2MP BSI-CMOS sensor

Raw Mode (.NRW)

24-120mm (equivalent) F1.8-5.6 optically-stabilized zoom lens

ISO 80-3200 (up to ISO 12,800 in manual mode)

Maximum 10fps shooting (for 10 frames)

Full HD, 1080/60i/30p movie recording

3" 921k-dot rear LCD screen

23 Scene modes including 3D

Built-in GPS

Approx 200 shots per charge (CIPA)

The Coolpix P330's lens is the fastest in the current Coolpix lineup, offering a maximum aperture of F1.8 at the wide end, just like its predecessor the P310. Don't get too excited though, because like Canon's PowerShot S110, the P330's lens gets pretty slow, pretty quickly as you zoom in. At the 120mm telephoto setting, its maximum aperture is F5.6. Not bad, and wide enough to give a hint of subject/background separation for portraiture, but not exactly 'fast'. Unfortunately, if you want a camera with a big sensor that still fits into your shirt pocket, this is the sacrifice that you have to make. Users of rivals such as Sony's Cyber-shot RX100 will be all too familiar with the compromise.

The P330 might look like an iterative upgrade to the P310, but the new camera has a larger 1/1.7" sensor, inherited from the P7700, and offers a raw capture mode. Both features should make the new camera more attractive to enthusiasts, and bring it into line with what now seems its most obvious competitor, the Canon PowerShot S110.

Here's how the P330's sensor compares to other cameras in terms of size (illustration to scale, but not actual size).

As you can see, 1/1.7" is a meaningful size increase over 1/2.3", but both are still considerable smaller than the CX-format that Sony uses in its Cyber-shot RX100, not to mention Micro Four Thirds and APS-C.

This graph (click for a larger version) shows the P330's aperture range expressed in terms of equivalent aperture for depth-of-field purposes. Because of the size of its sensor, the P330's aperture range of F1.8-5.6 is roughly equivalent to F8-22 when it comes to ability to offer background blur. This might not sound impressive, but it a fraction better than Canon PowerShot S110's lens in this respect.

In other regards, the P330 is basically what we'd expect of a camera in this class, at this point in time. Full manual exposure control is available, and PASM modes can be accessed from the exposure mode dial on the camera's top plate. The P330 has two command dials - one on the top, for operation with the thumb of the right hand, and one on the rear, comprising the 4-way controller.

As well as PASM modes, the P330 also offers a range of Scene modes for JPEG capture, and in common with most of its peers, GPS is built-in, too. The camera is also compatible with Nikon's WU-1a Wi-Fi adapter.

The P330 (left) is exactly the same size as the P310, which is pretty impressive, given the increased dimensions of its sensor. The two cameras are in fact, pretty much twins. From the front, the only difference (beyond labeling) is the texture of the vertical rubber micro-grip - the P330's grip has a checkerboard pattern texture, which makes it slightly 'grippier'.

It's the same story on the back of the camera, where the P330 is - again - exactly the same as its predecessor in terms of control layout. Both cameras feature the same 921k dot 3" rear LCD, with a 4-way controller and integrated dial in a control cluster to the right of the display.

Foreword / notes

If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital
Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help
you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based
on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review
before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed
at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom
right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a
larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply
use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section
either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the
navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their
monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted)
PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make
out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale
blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should
be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally
A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2013 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Nikon P330 will lose some customers to Ricoh since you can now purchase the GR Digital IV for just about the same price as a P330. Doesn't matter how good the P330 may be, it will not come close to the GRDIV.

P330 is only better for its Zoom capability and its HD Video. In every other respect the GRDIV is simply a superior product.

It is different camera for different purpose. If the fund available, I will skip the Ricoh GRD IV for new Ricoh GR w APS-C sensor. Ricoh should come out replacement for Ricoh GX-200 with some "gimmicK" feature as GPS, Wifi or direct transfer to popular web media.

Different purpose? Really? Not sure what you think people buy these types of cameras for... The only thing the P330 can do that the GRD IV can't do is zoom and do HD Video. It gets very slow very quick when you zoom in, and I still question how many people really need/use HD video on cameras in this class. Regarding photography, the GRD IV is superior to the P330, S110, and every other "enthusiast compact" in the $300 - $400 price range, and that's why it WAS an outstanding deal.

The GRD IV is gone now (no longer available from Adorama or BH Photo...other places have it, but probably not Authorized Ricoh dealers), so those of you who were debating have missed out. You'll have to be satisfied with either the P330 (now down to $319) or S110 (about $300 now). Both are great cameras, but neither comes close to the Ricoh GR Digital IV.

Don't know why it would "feel more natural" as DPR states to change aperture or EV compensation with a ring around the lens as unlike a DSLR where you are actually holding the lens in your left hand, on a compact there is virtually no reason to have your hand anywhere near the tiny retractable lens.

Looking at the P330 manual, I just realized that it has a command dial (the knurled dial next to the shutter button which will be in easy reach with your thumb). This is even more reason why the lens ring is not needed.

A camera like the S110 or XZ-1 doesn't have a command dial under your thumb so it relies on the four-way controller and the ring around the lens.

Cool camera. But I can't help but think that the lens is just not fast enough to be really exciting. Why not a 1.8 and make it awesome. Also, it should manually extend to make the camera super fast on startup. But cool. I am a big fan of the Ricoh GRD line. But it lacks a kick ass sensor. This has that, but Nikon needs to go further.

actually there is no need to compare sensor sizes any more as we have the equiv. *f-number* vs equiv. focal length chart, that nothing special will happen when the sensor size changes (well they are included in the chart already).

when people say "small sensor" they usually mean higher noise level and deeper depth of field, but these really have nothing to do with the sensor size. the real reason is the lenses on these "small sensor" cameras got small apertures (we do have problem to make large aperture lenses for too small sensors).

I'd like to see a beautiful chart to include all the lenses from mobile phones to mid-format, just like the one used by DxOMark sensor tests.

and please do delete the words "for depth-of-field purposes" which we do not need. that every effect controlled by aperture will be exactly the same as on a 35mm format camera with no exception.

It seems to make sense that they include that text- otherwise, you get people thinking that f/1.8 gathers more light (and allows a faster shutter speed) on a 1" sensor vs a 1/1.7" sensor. That's a conversation I've seen in threads here many times.

"and please do delete the words "for depth-of-field purposes" which we do not need. that every effect controlled by aperture will be exactly the same as on a 35mm format camera with no exception."

Wrong. Smaller sensors are usually made on better technology compared to large sensors, so image quality parameters (noise etc) don't fall anywhere as fast as sensor areas suggest (simply because the larger sensors made on old technologies cannot utilize the light they get as efficiently). To the point that sometimes smaller sensors are actually better.

Hmm, I don't understand the sense of this digicam category (like S110), given the latest fast-lens offerings. If one wants better low light perfromance/IQ - why not make a real step to faster lenses, like XZ-1/2 or G15? These also fit well into a jacket pocket.

If smaller, lighter and cheaper variants of 1/1,7" sensors make sense, then it would be with more zoom range, i.e. 28-200 but smaller aperture as the P-7700.

BTW I am currently discovering Marseille with a Canon A720 that I got at ebay after having sold an A710 there years ago :) The IQ is really good (8 Mpx), it offers 35-210 zoom range AND an optical viewfinder AND fits into a pocket.Pfff...

I think CX is a brilliant word for "compact". I used to think that 1/1.7" was a good one but now I would like to see 1/2.3" for super-zooms and 1" for image quality (can be very compact with primes or moderate zooms, and CX itself can die).

for compacts the real issue is the size of the lenses, that if we don't want large aperture lenses, we won't need large sensors, either. we can have 24-120/4 equiv. for CX (8.8-44/1.5) which will beat the current APS-C but too big to be called compact.

While I don't understand the reviewer's statement:"The P330 (left) is exactly the same size as the P310, which is pretty impressive, given the increased dimensions of its sensor"

It's finally quite exactly the same lens and sensor specs that Canon puts in the Powershot S series since years, and those are even a bit slimmer. I certainly won'T exchange 2.0 against 1.8 or 5.9 for 5.6 given the S110's body is 5mm slimmer. The aperture difference would have to be bigger to get me excited.

The reviewer's only talking about how Nikon managed to fit the 1/1.7" sensor in the exact same body as the P310, which had a 1/2.3" sensor. His statement has nothing to do with the Canon S110, but clearly Canon was able to achieve such a small camera by using the slower f2-5.9 lens.

Personally if IQ matches the P7700 I'd take this over the Canon any day.

The G15 and S110 do not have better IQ than the P7700. All you need to do is look at DxOMark sensor ratings to see the P7700 has the best IQ performance of ALL 1/1.7" compacts due to it's superior high ISO, color depth and DR.

If that's Canon being "miles ahead" perhaps we don't have the same definition of the term.

Apart from a slightly wider zoom range and lower price (which may not last long), I cannot see where this P330 is better than the Olympus XZ-2 : faster tele end, optional (good) EVF, adapter tube for hood and filters, tele converter, articulated LCD, hot shoe, better battery life,...Same advantages on the XZ-1, but the XZ-1 has a 10MP-only CCD sensor (no BSI-CMOS) with lower high ISO performance and lower frame rate.

I can't see much point in this. Almost exactly the same camera as the Canon S110 which was introduced in 9/2012... Just in Nikon brand. S110 already has similarly specced lens, similar size and RAW capture.

Yes, for sure competition is always good, even though the Canon is pretty reasonably priced already. And I'm happy to see that several manufacturers see this type of camera as an interesting product. But I would have liked to see Nikon improve the concept in some way. But I guess that's up to Canon in the next iteration of the S1xx series to differentiate from Nikon :)

"Almost exactly the same camera as the Canon S110 which was introduced in 9/2012"

Actually, it is more like Canon S100 introduced in 2011... S110 has WiFi instead of GPS, being practically identical otherwise.

Of course most people use the cameras while traveling, and recording picture location is a useful feature, while accessible WiFi is unavailable. And when they get back home where WiFi is available, SD card reader (which is built-in into any PC now) works much faster than any WiFi and does not consume the camera's battery.

I have a D600 for work (defense contractor; product shots and PR stuff), and use my P7700 constantly for snaps. I love it. It is the P-series I've always wanted and waited patiently for. If this is functionally a smaller P7700 (for snaps), I'll buy a refurb or used one to use in circumstances a truly pocketable camera arise.

Considering that the P330 is identical in size and shape to the P310 and P300, you could look at one of the many size comparisons that have already come. I'll leave the Googling to you, but this might be enough:

It is what it is. I'd probably be shooting it at the wide end (24mm is a good thing) and having f/1.8 at that point is also a good thing. Raw is a good thing. Tiny size is a good thing. No hot shoe, well, you can't have everything.

If it takes the same pics as the P7700 (more or less, since they share the same sensor) it would be a fantastic "pocketable" camera to have for owners of other Nikon cameras.

It's incorrect to say something can never be done. However, this is not yet bringing pocket cameras into serious consideration. This size sensor does not bring state of the art quality to the table yet. We have entered an age; where ISO 1600 needs to be very clean, and 3200 on it's tales. Currently, that seems to be M3/4 size sensors, and should improve. The compromise is too great; at least for high quality results, in all but ideal conditions. That, is yesterdays news, and I don't mean to disrespect the hard work put into the good improvements. Yet, if they are not in total balance, what is the point? Hey! Look at my amazingly tiny, and controllable, bad picture taker.

It's a great chart. "Equivalent Aperture" is incorrect. There is no such thing. It is your location change (given the same F-Stop), due to a different, and cropped angle of view, that effects the thinness of your DOF, and then there's also many qualities of Bokeh to be considered, for portraiture. F-Stop is F-Stop.

So, why not call it thinness of DOF, instead of Aperture equivalents? I understand, that stating it in F-Stops, as if on 35mm sized, full frame sensors, and that thinness of dept of field, might be memory for some; but not everyone will get that. Here, a picture is worth a thousand words. Why not state the DOF ranges, in distance, to show thinness, as desirable; instead of F-Stops? Not to mention, at some point, it can become too thin, for comfort (focusing).

The design is based on the ability to fit in a pocket, it's surprising reading the complaints about lens speed in this regard.

Even so, it is still doing better in equivalent aperture than the previous champion in this size class. Nikon is late to the party for sure, but this is directly comparable to the Canon S series and for not bad money.You want a faster lens compact? then there's always the slightly larger class like the LX7.

Those complaints are likely from users familiar with the RX100. The difference in thickness is only 4mm (32mm vs. 36mm), but the Sony has a much faster lens and bigger sensor, and it most certainly does fit in your pocket. Not exactly a fair comparison given the difference in price, but the form factor is nearly the same. The Canon S series is still the slimmest at 27mm thick for the S110.

Hmmm... well have a look at the Oly XZ-10 that is coming soon. Same 5x zoom, but 1.8- 2.7. It also has function ring around the lens and touch screen, only downside is the 1/2.3" sensor. Overall camera looks the same size a P 330

Also, seeing Nikon's and Olympus' offerings in the lower-end of their enthusiast camera offerings, I realize how Canon's S100 is the camera that has aged better in the whole digital photography history. Being the best choice at its price range two years after its initial release is no small feat!

"People tend to ignore the video aspect. Who wants 24fps as the only 1080 option? Yeah, no one."

Exactly, Canon's definitely lagging in this respect.

Nevertheless, it still remains to be seen whether the actual 1080p video resolution of the P330 is any good. That of the P300 was REALLY bad and was only a little bit higher than the 720p mode of the same camera - and waaaay worse than that of, say, the iPhone 4S / 5 or the Nokia 808.

Can't say I care. Cameras this size are far from ideal camcorder replacements. Too hard to hold steady, hard to zoom smoothly (not hard - impossible), and no good indoors. 24fps really isn't bad, and for casual use I'd find it just fine. Sure, others are better at serious video work, but this is very good for what it's designed for, vacation pictures and casual social snapshots, and their video equivalents.

I have P300 and I am super happy with it. I didn't think P310 was an upgrade so I was waiting and waiting for this camera... but the lens kind of disappoints. Here is here dilemma.. this or the new Oly XZ-10. Oly has a smaller sensor, but a much better lens, focus/function ring and a touch screen. Same price. Which to get? Any opinions?

just wait for the reviews ... the XZ-10 sensor might be close in performance to the one from S110 and P330. If the XZ-10 lens is as good optically as the one on XZ-1/2 it could be a winner. But with the larger zoom range and lower price level, that remains to be seen.

I ditched the S110 because it needs too much in-camera processing to compensate for the very compact lens (just like RX100). Probably the P330 is a bit better optically, and I guess the XZ-10 needs even less internal processing - which usually means more even images across the frame.

Yikes, good to see Nikon's lens speed still puts it alongside Canon S1110 for worst effective aperture f/8.5 or so wide open. Much worse than their P7700 and trailing the other competitors by quite a margin - up to two stops at the tele end.